<!DOCTYPE HTML PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD HTML 4.0 Transitional//EN">
<HTML><HEAD>
<META content="text/html; charset=US-ASCII" http-equiv=Content-Type>
<META name=GENERATOR content="MSHTML 8.00.6001.19046"></HEAD>
<BODY style="FONT-FAMILY: Arial; COLOR: #000000; FONT-SIZE: 10pt" id=role_body bottomMargin=7 leftMargin=7 rightMargin=7 topMargin=7><FONT id=role_document color=#000000 size=2 face=Arial>
<DIV>
<DIV>
<DIV><FONT style="BACKGROUND-COLOR: transparent" color=#000000 size=2 face=Arial>: <BR>: Again, I do not see a problem with (1) omitting the picture,
(2)<BR>: blurring the picture so that the alteration is self-evident, (3)
noting<BR>: the deletion in a caption to the picture. All of which is equally
what<BR>: their readership wants them to do -- but without the
misinformation<BR>: about the Sec of State not looking like she's in the loop in
the raid.<BR>: <BR>: Geneivas daas comes from the vast majority of pictures not
being altered<BR>: in this way, and therefore the readership thinking that any
given picture<BR>: represents reality. [--RMB on Areivim]<BR>:
----------------<BR><BR>
<DIV><FONT style="BACKGROUND-COLOR: transparent" color=#000000 size=2 face=Arial>From: "Moshe Y. Gluck" <A href="mailto:mgluck@gmail.com">mgluck@gmail.com</A><BR></FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT style="BACKGROUND-COLOR: transparent" color=#000000 size=2 face=Arial></FONT> </DIV>I was thinking about what R' MB was writing about
this subject - that shinui<BR>ha'emes is sheker - and wondering
.....<BR>Thoughts?<BR><BR>KT,<BR>MYG<BR><BR>>> how can it be geneivas daas
(i.e. from their readership), when this is<BR>>>exactly what their
readership wants them to do? [--R' Shaya Potter, on
Areivim]<BR><BR></DIV></FONT>
<DIV><FONT style="BACKGROUND-COLOR: transparent" color=#000000 size=2 face=Arial></FONT> </DIV>
<DIV><FONT style="BACKGROUND-COLOR: transparent" color=#000000 size=2 face=Arial>>>>>></FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT style="BACKGROUND-COLOR: transparent" color=#000000 size=2 face=Arial>As RSP wrote on Areivim, even if the readership doesn't know exactly
which photo is altered, they know that photos are altered. They know that
the policy of their newspaper is not to show photos of women. No one is
pulling any wool over their eyes.</FONT></DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV><FONT style="BACKGROUND-COLOR: transparent" color=#000000 size=2 face=Arial>It is extremely difficult to see where there is any tzad of sheker
here or any halachic problem whatsoever. We have already disposed of every
possible argument: They violated a copyright? No, they did
not. They led their readers to think that the Secretary of State
is not in the loop in Washington? No, they did not. </FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT style="BACKGROUND-COLOR: transparent" color=#000000 size=2 face=Arial></FONT> </DIV>
<DIV><FONT style="BACKGROUND-COLOR: transparent" color=#000000 size=2 face=Arial>One of the things I am puzzled about is the complete lack of
worldwide outrage over the White House's falsification -- which really /was/
geneivas da'as ("Here are a bunch of important people in the White House
Situation Room watching the invasion of the Osama compound as it occurs" -- er
no actually, here a bunch of people looking at nobody knows what.) At the
same time, there is world-wide feigned outrage over a photo in an obscure,
small-circulation newspaper in New York. My suspicion -- I say this with a
heavy heart -- is that our enemies want to make Jews look as bad as Arabs
("these guys oppress women and these guys oppress women"), and some of our own
fellow Orthodox Jews are mindlessly jumping on the bandwagon, aiding and
abetting our enemies. <BR><BR></DIV></FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT lang=0 color=#0000ff size=2 face=Arial FAMILY="SANSSERIF" PTSIZE="10"><BR><B>--Toby Katz<BR>================</FONT><FONT lang=0 color=#000000 size=2 face=Arial FAMILY="SANSSERIF" PTSIZE="10"><BR></B><BR><BR><BR><BR>_____________________</FONT></DIV></DIV></FONT></BODY></HTML>